In April 2008, NCI/SEER hosted a meeting in San Francisco, CA and invited all SEER PIs and a few key informants to discuss the future of the SEER program. Discussions centered on a few key considerations including SEER[unreadable]s mission, challenges in obtaining population-based surveillance data in a timely fashion, the utilization and overall quality of SEER data, and how SEER registries can remain relevant given the changes in foci of cancer research (i.e., molecular and genetic research). At the end of this meeting, four [unreadable]Action Teams[unreadable] were formed to evaluate priority issues. These Action Teams were: - Evaluation of Registry Processes - Data Use and Relevance, Marketing - Core Data and Timeliness - Automation, Alternative Technologies The Core Data and Timeliness Action Team made a few recommendations with regard to data and submission timeliness. They specifically recommended that SEER consider a Two-Tier reporting system wherein all SEER registries report incident record data to SEER no later than 6 months after the end of the diagnosis year (i.e., report 2007 cases on July 1, 2008). Incident Record Data was defined by the Core Data and Timeliness Action Team as [unreadable]as the minimum data set required to calculate annual age-, sex- and race-specific incidence rates for each SEER registry and for SEER as a whole.[unreadable] These data should, therefore, include Name, Date of Birth, Address, SSN, Sex, Race, Spanish Origin, Diagnosis Date, Primary Site, Histology, Laterality, and Behavior. The question of whether central registries receive these data in the time requested (6 months after the end of the diagnosis year) remains unanswered. Furthermore, the extent to which the initial data (via pathology reports) are (a) sufficient to establish an incident record;and, (b) are reliable enough that data can be released prior to the submission of a hospital abstract are also unresolved.